Thursday, February 18, 2010

Tortoise and the Hare

Lord Farrar has a post on the Tortoise and the Hare, taken from Trans Tasman. Sir David agreed "with the sentiments...[P]ushing through reform that merely results in a new Government at the next election that reverses that reform, is dumb."

David, and most of the commenters on the post, agree with an incremental approach to turning this country around. That's because there is risk of electoral defeat if "bold" changes are pushed through too quickly, and a follow up risk of the reforms being overturned very quickly.

Questions arise.

How many of the following major reforms, during the "Klarkistan" era, were implemended incrementally? And, how many have been overturned?

I believe the answers are none and none.
  • Raising top tax rate to 39%
  • Working for Families
  • Employment Relations Act (consequential repeal of Employment Contracts Act)
  • Purchase of Kiwibank
  • Purchase of Air New Zealand
  • Reformation of District Health Boards
  • Removal of Privy Council
  • Decriminalising prostitution
  • Civil Unions
  • Foreshore and Seabed law
  • Interest free student loans
  • Kiwirail purchase
  • Kiwisaver
  • Repeal of section 59
  • Emissions Trading Scheme
  • Scrapping of air defence wing
  • Electoral Finance Act
UPDATE: Oops, I have realised the EFA is gone, mostly. I guess the answers are none and one.

4 comments:

showmethetaxcut said...

No way is the UK ever going to give us back appeals to the best legal minds in the Commonwealth (even if we change our mind).

Appeals to the PC were essentiaaly at the expense of the UK taxpayer.

Anonymous said...

Good observation Gooner.

Now put a time line to that list and see if Key can match the "rate of change" that Helen established.

It's my belief that Key will get through more work in the long run.

Only likely difference is that one party works for social equity and the other for individual rights bracketed to individual responsibility.

David Baigent

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Well now, let's see.

DHBs are well along the road to some serious reforms.

Clearly, tax reform is on the way.

Do you have the slightest idea how difficult, futile and expensive it would be to re-establish a strike wing?

Perhaps you didn't notice that she was actually rejected in 2005 but stole the election with massive bribes, public theft and gross electoral over-spending.

I want to see NACTionalMP in power for at least three terms and preferably longer.

Now, more to the point, what are you doing about winning a second seat for ACT? Putting up a candidate in Gisborne?

Anonymous said...

The original supposition is incorrect.

The Douglas reforms in the first term of the Lange government were radical. Some would say extreme. The country was stuffed and Douglas got in and fixed it. Did it see Lange routed at the next election? No their majority increased, regardless of the rewriting of history over the last three terms. The main reason why the Labour government was not elected for a third term was Lange fatally stopping for his cup of tea and letting the left take off in their socialist direction.

Time for Smile & Wave and the Dipton Kid to man up and actually put us back on a sustainable path. Sorry AF incremental step change may sound politically neutral but it just aint going to do it - either fix the country or retain National in power for three terms.

Paranormal